4.5 Article

Metabolism of green tea catechins by the human small intestine

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY JOURNAL
卷 5, 期 10, 页码 1050-1059

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/biot.201000214

关键词

Catechins; Gallic acid; Green tea; Metabolism; Small intestine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Numerous studies have shown that green tea polyphenols can be degraded in the colon, and there is abundant knowledge about the metabolites of these substances that appear in urine and plasma after green tea ingestion. However, there is very little information on the extent and nature of intestinal degradation of green tea catechins in humans. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine in detail the microbial metabolism and chemical stability of these polyphenols in the small intestine using a well-established ex vivo model. For this purpose, fresh ileostomy fluids from two probands were incubated for 24 h under anaerobic conditions with (+)-catechin (C), (-)-epicatechin (EC), (-)-epicatechin 3-O-gallate (ECG), (-)-epigallocatechin (EGC), (-)-epigallocatchin 3-O-gallate (EGCG) and gallic acid (GA). After lyophilisation and extraction, metabolites were separated, identified and quantified by high performance liquid chromatography-photodiode array detection (HPLC-DAD) and HPLC-ESI-tandem mass spectrometry. Two metabolites of EC and C (3',4',5'-trihydroxyphenyl-gamma-valerolactone and 3',4'-dihydroxyphenyl-gamma-valerolactone) were identified. In addition, 3',4',5'-trihydroxyphenyl-gamma-valerolactone was detected as a metabolite of EGC, and (after 24-h incubation) pyrogallol as a degradation product of GA. Cleavage of the GA esters of EGCG and ECG was also observed, with variations dependent on the sources (probands) of the ileal fluids, which differed substantially microbiotically. The results provide new information about the degradation of green tea catechins in the gastrointestinal tract, notably that microbiota-dependent liberation of GA esters may occur before these compounds reach the colon.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据